[NO BUG] Flaps .. again

[Cab]

Something being lost here is the impression that an Ironworks aeroplane would have flaps "JAM" in the first place.

There is an impression aeroplanes just "break"..they dont.

On the aircraft i used to fly we had an aircraft deploy flaps at double its limit speed. This is not a small aircraft travelling slowly either.

Result..nothing.

Aircraft lands has swarms of engineers running around with torches etc, zero damage at 350 kts on an civilian airliner.

This isnt a carrier based fighter from the toughest construction manufacturer ever to build aircraft but an Airbus built to a budget not a G limit..

This jamming thing is something that yes i understand penalizes people but its also highy unrealistic given the usage and operational evidence of them being used in a much broader envelope.

Did i mention its a Grumman aircraft builder of basically the toughest war machines ever built.

This is why crews did rely on the use of flaps outside the normal envelope because they knew it was built like a truck and they knew the flaps wouldnt jam.

The use of flaps out side normal envelope is widely written about and denying that use is denying a very effective tactic use extensively by experienced crews.

"Hey chief i blew the flaps out again today a case of beers ok?"

Removing this as a valid ACM option from the F14's arsenal is a major error in my opinion.

This rolling of the dice when in reality the aircraft at speeds in the order of 350kts or less could easily take flap usage without damage disabling the system turns a valid tactic into a crap shoot based off a desire to stop very valid tactics why used the very strengths of the F14 frequently.

Further to that flaps dont break...they ripple when over G'd having suffered structural damage. The retraction/extension mechanism is easily strong enough to deal with the load the surfaces however are the weak point.

Anyway a minor point on a very good aircraft in the sim and thanks Heatblur for bring the legend alive..

 

Have you read this thread?

[wadman]

 

Have you read this thread?

 

Lol... It seems reading comprehension is lacking these days or certain desk jockeys, for some strange reason, believe they are smarter than the actual F-14 pilots serving as SME'S on the Heatblur Team. Lots of references to anecdotal writings that lack the details that veteran drivers like Victory205 have provided to help understand the real world limitations for flap usage based on how they work/were designed.

 

Also, you have to keep in mind that it was likely easier to manage flying "on the edge" in real life given the physical feedback (g-forces, etc.,) one would have than it is in the sim - so much easier to accidentally/unknowingly cross the line in the sim.

[dehowie]

 

Have you read this thread?

 

As i said when talking to first hand experience id take that over reading 2 pages of comments

You can find plenty of first hand direct commentary on usage of flaps in low speed ACM maybe you should be reading those rather than me reading pages of complaints?

Overwhelmingly the usage of flaps in turning fights was widespread just go ask an ex F14 driver.

I know 3 first hand all of whom attest to the strength of flaps and the aircraft.

I know them and will take that as being good enough for me.

If the advisor to HB is saying the reverse thats fair enough as every pilots experience will be different depending on units, commanders, engineers, training.

There is pleny of written first hand evidence of usage but i have never seen a single photo of a jammed flap F-14 coming back onto the boat or field.

Have you? If you have feel free to share.

Because the penalty of using them is now so huge ie a completely jammed surface which would never jam like that(yes it might be damaged but damaging is not jamming) as such the F14 is losing a benefit of its flap system.

There has to be a better resolution than simply jamming the system that more reflects an operational degradation.

IE slower run time, degradation of capability that gets worse until failure.

The simple jamming is 1000 times more unrealistic than any use of flaps outside normal envelope.

 

 

 

 

 

[MurderOne]

 

As i said when talking to first hand experience id take that over reading 2 pages of comments

You can find plenty of first hand direct commentary on usage of flaps in low speed ACM maybe you should be reading those rather than me reading pages of complaints?

Overwhelmingly the usage of flaps in turning fights was widespread just go ask an ex F14 driver.

I know 3 first hand all of whom attest to the strength of flaps and the aircraft.

I know them and will take that as being good enough for me.

If the advisor to HB is saying the reverse thats fair enough as every pilots experience will be different depending on units, commanders, engineers, training.

There is pleny of written first hand evidence of usage but i have never seen a single photo of a jammed flap F-14 coming back onto the boat or field.

Have you? If you have feel free to share.

Because the penalty of using them is now so huge ie a completely jammed surface which would never jam like that(yes it might be damaged but damaging is not jamming) as such the F14 is losing a benefit of its flap system.

There has to be a better resolution than simply jamming the system that more reflects an operational degradation.

IE slower run time, degradation of capability that gets worse until failure.

The simple jamming is 1000 times more unrealistic than any use of flaps outside normal envelope.

 

 

 

 

 

There's literally an F-14 driver in the turn rate tanked thread that says otherwise. I have personally watched F-14s in the hangar bays getting repairs done for jammed flaps. It's post number 130 in the "turn rate tanked" thread.

 

"11-22-2020, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by Kula66 View Post

Wizard_03 - are you saying that pilots never used the flaps above 225kts and (at different times) never went above 7.5G as stated in NATOPS? If so, sorry I don't believe you.

Yes they did, almost always inadvertently, usually an over speed on takeoff. They also broke things, especially the flaps, and if while a student in training with an instructor on board, they received “downs” and suffered the consequences for their stupidity. The flaps locked out and broke torque tubes, even when operating within the flight envelope.

 

I pulled 8.2 G’s inadvertently while at Topgun. It broke the maneuvering flaps and eventually, an ECS heat exchanger that grounded the aircraft until it was replaced. My wingman also broke his auto wing sweep system due to an over G. You don’t hear these geniuses mention the aftermath of their over G exploits.

Full flaps were typically only used in a flat scissors, well within the structural envelope, at approx one G and below 150 KIAS. The torque tubes used a splined shaft to account for wing bending, and operating it under massive G caused failures. Reversing direction was tough on it as well, and the greater the extension, the greater the load on the splines and the shafts. Using the flap handle and ending up with locked out flaps, meaning the wings couldn’t sweep limiting acceleration and speed in combat is a stupid place to be.

 

Must say, I had never heard the story of Dale’s panicked SAM break, where upon he over stressed and departed the aircraft, stalled an engine (gee, I wonder if the MCB CB was pulled?), and ended up single engine, out of airspeed and ideas over Baghdad at night in the AAA envelope. That takes talent that most don’t possess."

Edited November 26, 2020 by MurderOne

[QuiGon]

I don't really undestand why people have such issues with this? It's really not difficult to wait untill you are below 220kts and then the deploy flaps. Haven't had any issues with that at all after I got aware of the new behaviour. :dunno:

[Relayer]

 

As i said when talking to first hand experience id take that over reading 2 pages of comments

You can find plenty of first hand direct commentary on usage of flaps in low speed ACM maybe you should be reading those rather than me reading pages of complaints?

Overwhelmingly the usage of flaps in turning fights was widespread just go ask an ex F14 driver.

I know 3 first hand all of whom attest to the strength of flaps and the aircraft.

I know them and will take that as being good enough for me.

If the advisor to HB is saying the reverse thats fair enough as every pilots experience will be different depending on units, commanders, engineers, training.

There is pleny of written first hand evidence of usage but i have never seen a single photo of a jammed flap F-14 coming back onto the boat or field.

Have you? If you have feel free to share.

Because the penalty of using them is now so huge ie a completely jammed surface which would never jam like that(yes it might be damaged but damaging is not jamming) as such the F14 is losing a benefit of its flap system.

There has to be a better resolution than simply jamming the system that more reflects an operational degradation.

IE slower run time, degradation of capability that gets worse until failure.

The simple jamming is 1000 times more unrealistic than any use of flaps outside normal envelope.

 

 

 

 

 

Evidently you know best in this matter.

[Cab]

 

You can find plenty of first hand direct commentary on usage of flaps in low speed ACM maybe you should be reading those rather than me reading pages of complaints?

 

Emphasis on "low speed ACM". How fast and at what g-load do you think they could used?

 

Also, I was thinking about the answers rather than the complaints

 

 

Overwhelmingly the usage of flaps in turning fights was widespread just go ask an ex F14 driver.

 

How widespread? My understanding is that many squadron CO's prohibited the practice. If true, I wonder why?

 

Also, it doesn't address speed and g's. Specifics are important here, especially if one is violating NATOPS.

 

I know 3 first hand all of whom attest to the strength of flaps and the aircraft.

 

Taking that at face value have they given you speed and g numbers to share here?

 

There is pleny of written first hand evidence of usage but i have never seen a single photo of a jammed flap F-14 coming back onto the boat or field.

 

How would that look any different from normal landing flaps? Unless you are thinking of them getting stuck in an intermediate position.

 

 

Because the penalty of using them is now so huge ie a completely jammed surface which would never jam like that(yes it might be damaged but damaging is not jamming) as such the F14 is losing a benefit of its flap system.

There has to be a better resolution than simply jamming the system that more reflects an operational degradation.

IE slower run time, degradation of capability that gets worse until failure.

The simple jamming is 1000 times more unrealistic than any use of flaps outside normal envelope.

 

If I understand the problem, when people talk about the flaps jamming in the down position they are talking about the torque tubes breaking. Are you suggesting flaps could still be moved when a torque tube was broken?

 

[Wizard_03]

You absolutely can use full flap in BFM now but unlike before if your exceeding their envelope then they break. I don't see what the issue is.

 

Don't over speed the flaps, problem solved.

[draconus]

You absolutely can use full flap in BFM now but unlike before if your exceeding their envelope then they break. I don't see what the issue is.

 

Don't over speed the flaps, problem solved.

 

That's it. Nothing is taken away. You can still use them however you want, win, hit Esc > Choose slot... again and again and again :thumbup:

[Skysurfer]

Paco's words on the use of flaps in BFM

(timestamp included 35:59)

[IronMike]

Paco's words on the use of flaps in BFM

(timestamp included 35:59)

 

Thank you, that's what I was looking for, for Maxsin, but didnt have time to rewatch all for the timestamp.

[Baz000]

Here is a relevant excerpt from the Haynes F-14 owners workshop manual.

 

It is written by NFO Bill “Libby” Lind in chapter 5 Back-seat magic.

 

written verbatim as the following in relation to circuit breakers in the back seat.

 

”Although strictly forbidden, breakers controlling flaps could also be articulated, temporarily giving the Tomcat outsized lift in a visual engagement but with great risk to flight control mechanical gear if not done properly. Woe betide the crew who came home after such a stunt went poorly.”

 

so lets grab a few key words out of that, “strictly forbidden”, “temporarily giving the Tomcat outsized lift”, “great risk to flight control mechanical gear”, “Woe betide”, “stunt”, “went poorly”.

 

It sounds like it is not a recommended practice, and flying good BFM is far more preferable... Also by the simple addition of the word “stunt” shows that the mindset is it isn’t a viable Tomcat tactic and far more can go wrong with limited temporary gain in lift.

 

Sounds like the cons of doing it far outweigh the pros, or one could also say the cost vs. benefit analysis.

 

Also, that temporary gain in lift should come with a drag penalty which you don’t necessarily want additional drag for energy retention in traditional BFM fighting.

 

Anyways that was my .02, just remembered reading a blurb about it in the book.

[Kula66]

'cons of doing it far outweigh the pros' ... jammed flaps or dead? We're all different, you fly by the training rules, but I'll do what ever it takes :)

[Noctrach]

'cons of doing it far outweigh the pros' ... jammed flaps or dead? We're all different, you fly by the training rules, but I'll do what ever it takes :)

 

Or to paraphrase slightly, some of us train like we fight, others of us fly poor BFM... :music_whistling:

 

Not getting back to the boat because of flap/slat lockout sounds like a case of "dead" to me.

I suggest unless people have something substantial to add, these threads get locked and we move on.

[Jackjack171]

'cons of doing it far outweigh the pros' ... jammed flaps or dead? We're all different, you fly by the training rules, but I'll do what ever it takes :)

 

Or to paraphrase slightly, some of us train like we fight, others of us fly poor BFM... :music_whistling:

 

Not getting back to the boat because of flap/slat lockout sounds like a case of "dead" to me.

I suggest unless people have something substantial to add, these threads get locked and we move on.

Exactly!

[Wizard_03]

'cons of doing it far outweigh the pros' ... jammed flaps or dead? We're all different, you fly by the training rules, but I'll do what ever it takes :)

 

Or you know Jam your flaps, and pull your pants down for next bandit cause you can't sweep your wings anymore and die anyway. ;)

[Kula66]

No, I just get another plane ... its a game ;)

 

PS> No need for vulgarity

[captain_dalan]

On 11/21/2020 at 3:36 AM, fat creason said:

 

The flap jamming model is not like what you described at all. It's not possible to jam flaps at 200 knots, its not even possible to jam them at 235 knots, and they don't jam right as you hit any particular speed. They will also not jam at low flap angles seen during maneuver flap deployments. That's what non-boolean logic means in this case. The possibility of jamming increases the more you overspeed the flaps, as well as increasing chance the more you over-G the flaps. They don't just immediately jam when speed > 221 KIAS or G load > 2.5. A 2G turn is equivalent to a 60 deg bank to give you some perspective. The chance also increases if you try to actuate them while overspeeding or over-Ging. As the flaps deploy further, the possibly also increases (high forces/larger incidence angle to the oncoming wind). If you realize you're going too fast, slow down first before you retract them. Fixed in a certain position they can handle higher loads.

 

Remember that the flaps on the Tomcat are very large, and at full deployment the forces they can generate grow rapidly with airspeed, even 10-20 knots more. The flaps were never intended for combat use, they should only be used in takeoff or landing type situations. It has nothing to do with air-quake.

Then 1 of two things may have happened.

1. I misread the airspeed needle and i wasn't at 220 knots but some other number, 270 maybe? It could happen to elderly people. The flaps warning button didn't turn on though. And it's supposed to be flashing at 225, right?
2. I don't know if this is possible, but can dropping of flaps generate momentary spike in the g-load? I'm sure i wasn't banking at 60 degrees, but 45-50 is quite likely. That would be roughly what, 1.5g? So if i dropped the flaps and they generated extra lift, would that translate to some extra g?

Edited December 5, 2020 by captain_dalan

[captain_dalan]

On 11/24/2020 at 3:09 PM, draconus said:

 

1. No such option for auxiliary flaps. Only for maneuvering flaps - but that only for certain speed/aoa. 2. You must be joking about considering deliberate no-flaps landings.

1. Not true:
"Automatic Retraction. In aircraft BuNo 158978 through 161167 not incorporating AYC 66OP1, automatic flap and slat retraction from the landing and takeoff position is provided for airspeeds greater than 225 knots for any FLAP handle position within the normal range of 0” to 35”. "
2. Why not? She's got more then enough lift in her. Maneuver flaps should be sufficient for anything but boat landings

[draconus]

11 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

1. Not true:
"Automatic Retraction. In aircraft BuNo 158978 through 161167 not incorporating AYC 66OP1, automatic flap and slat retraction from the landing and takeoff position is provided for airspeeds greater than 225 knots for any FLAP handle position within the normal range of 0” to 35”. "
2. Why not? She's got more then enough lift in her.

1. That'd mean from 72' 70-GR up to 79' 110-GR A's. Will it be modeled then for our Iranian bird?

2. I meant the ridiculous idea of deliberately not using flaps even if you can by being afraid of jamming them.

[Skysurfer]

36 minutes ago, draconus said:

. I meant the ridiculous idea of deliberately not using flaps even if you can by being afraid of jamming them.

 

And this is where all the wrong thinking and misconceptions come from.

[Wildwind]

The behavior of the flaps is correctly modeled. 

 

The fact that the F-14's flaps could and often would jam if deployed at speeds or G-loads beyond what was specified in the NATOPS is well-documented.  I have to laugh at the person who says this isn't a problem based on their experience in other airplanes.  This was an issue specific to the F-14.  Of course you wouldn't see it in other airframes.

 

The technical reason that they were prone to this failure is also well-documented.  See the quote above from Victory's post on the subject.

 

As for "practicing the way you fight", I suggest you practice in a way so as not to cripple your aircraft so that you can then fight in a way that won't cripple your aircraft.  If the only way you know how to win is by using your flaps in ways that are likely to break them, in real life, you're going to have a problem if you get into a war because pretty soon your squadron is going to run out of planes because they are all down getting their flaps repaired.

 

As for "I'll just get another plane, it's just a game", players like you are one of the reasons I don't play multiplayer in DCS.

[draconus]

55 minutes ago, Wildwind said:

If the only way you know how to win is by using your flaps in ways that are likely to break them, in real life, you're going to have a problem if you get into a war because pretty soon your squadron is going to run out of planes because they are all down getting their flaps repaired.

 

As for "I'll just get another plane, it's just a game", players like you are one of the reasons I don't play multiplayer in DCS.

Nah, they'd probably weld them open, LOL.

You probably meant public MP. There are many sqads out there taking stuff seriously on closed servers.

[Wildwind]

56 minutes ago, draconus said:

You probably meant public MP. There are many sqads out there taking stuff seriously on closed servers.

 

Yeah, pretty much.

 

I'm aware of the serious multiplayer groups/squadrons existing, and I would love to be a part of something like that, but it's a bigger time commitment than I can make right now, unfortunately.  I have great respect for those groups, though.

 

Since I can't commit the time to be part of a serious squadron like that, and I don't want to deal with those on public servers who aren't interested in accurate simulation, I'm pretty much stuck with single-player for now.

[Kula66]

12 hours ago, Wildwind said:

As for "I'll just get another plane, it's just a game", players like you are one of the reasons I don't play multiplayer in DCS.

Thanks. You enjoy flying it your way, and I'll try and enjoy flying it my way ... Or is this a module or ex-14 pilots and the 'hard core' only? 

 

Although at the moment, the 14 has a number of critical issues meaning, for me, its not enjoyable at all - but  hey, I do have a piece of string to watch!

 

The ever changing flap modifications, everyone single one deemed NOW completely accurate and certified by SMEs, really doesn't help!

Edited December 6, 2020 by Kula66